Na channels are central to the generation of action potentials in all excitable cells such as neurons and myocytes. They play key roles in excitable tissue including brain, smooth muscles of the gastrointestinal tract, skeletal muscle, the peripheral nervous system, spinal cord and airway. As such they play key roles in a variety of disease states such as epilepsy (See, Moulard, B. and D. Bertrand (2002) “Epilepsy and sodium channel blockers” Expert Opin. Ther. Patents 12(1): 85-91)), pain (See, Waxman, S. G., S. Dib-Hajj, et al. (1999) “Sodium channels and pain” Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96(14): 7635-9 and Waxman, S. G., T. R. Cummins, et al. (2000) “Voltage-gated sodium channels and the molecular pathogenesis of pain: a review” J Rehabil Res Dev 37(5): 517-28), myotonia (See, Meola, G. and V. Sansone (2000) “Therapy in myotonic disorders and in muscle channelopathies” Neurol Sci 21(5): S953-61 and Mankodi, A. and C. A. Thornton (2002) “Myotonic syndromes” Curr Opin Neurol 15(5): 545-52), ataxia (See Meisler, M. H., J. A. Kearney, et al. (2002) “Mutations of voltage-gated sodium channels in movement disorders and epilepsy” Novartis Found Symp 241: 72-81), multiple sclerosis (See Black, J. A., S. Dib-Hajj, et al. (2000) “Sensory neuron-specific sodium channel SNS is abnormally expressed in the brains of mice with experimental allergic encephalomyelitis and humans with multiple sclerosis” Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97(21): 11598-602, and Renganathan, M., M. Gelderblom, et al. (2003) “Expression of Na(v)1.8 sodium channels perturbs the firing patterns of cerebellar purkinje cells” Brain Res 959(2): 235-42), irritable bowel (See, Su, X., R. E. Wachtel, et al. (1999) “Capsaicin sensitivity and voltage-gated sodium currents in colon sensory neurons from rat dorsal root ganglia” Am J Physiol 277(6 Pt 1): G1180-8, and Laird, J. M., V. Souslova, et al. (2002) “Deficits in visceral pain and referred hyperalgesia in Nav1.8 (SNS/PN3)-null mice” J Neurosci 22(19): 8352-6), urinary incontinence and visceral pain (See, Yoshimura, N., S. Seki, et al. (2001) “The involvement of the tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium channel Na(v)1.8 (PN3/SNS) in a rat model of visceral pain” J Neurosci 21(21): 8690-6), as well as an array of psychiatry dysfunctions such as anxiety and depression (See, Hurley, S. C. (2002) “Lamotrigine update and its use in mood disorders” Ann Pharmacother 36(5): 860-73). Voltage gated Na channels comprise a gene family consisting of 9 different subtypes (NaV1.1-NaV1.9). As shown in Table 1, these subtypes show tissue specific localization and functional differences (See, Goldin, A. L. (2001) “Resurgence of sodium channel research” Annu Rev Physiol 63: 871-94). Three members of the gene family (NaV1.8, 1.9, 1.5) are resistant to block by the well-known Na channel blocker TTX, demonstrating subtype specificity within this gene family. Mutational analysis has identified glutamate 387 as a critical residue for TTX binding (See, Noda, M., H. Suzuki, et al. (1989) “A single point mutation confers tetrodotoxin and saxitoxin insensitivity on the sodium channel II” FEBS Lett 259(1): 213-6).
TABLE 1(Abbreviations: CNS = central nervous system, PNS = peripheral nervoussystem, DRG = dorsal root ganglion, TG = Trigeminal ganglion):Na isoformTissueTTX IC50 IndicationsNaV1.1CNS, PNS10nMPain, Epilepsy,soma ofneurodegenerationneuronsNaV1.2CNS, high in10nMNeurodegenerationaxonsEpilepsyNaV1.3CNS,15nMPainembryonic,injured nervesNaV1.4Skeletal25nMMyotoniamuscleNaV1.5Heart2μMArrhythmia,long QTNaV1.6CNS6nMPain, movement disorderswidespread,most abundantNaV1.7PNS, DRG,25nMPain, NeuroendocrineterminalsdisordersneuroendocrineNaV1.8PNS, small>50μMPainneurons inDRG & TGNaV1.9PNS, small1μMPainneurons inDRG & TG
In general, voltage-gated sodium channels (NaVs) are responsible for initiating the rapid upstroke of action potentials in excitable tissue in nervous system, which transmit the electrical signals that compose and encode normal and aberrant pain sensations. Antagonists of NaV channels can attenuate these pain signals and are useful for treating a variety of pain conditions, including but not limited to acute, chronic, inflammatory, and neuropathic pain. Known NaV antagonists, such as TTX, lidocaine (See, Mao, J. and L. L. Chen (2000) “Systemic lidocaine for neuropathic pain relief” Pain 87(1): 7-17) bupivacaine, phenyloin (See, Jensen, T. S. (2002) “Anticonvulsants in neuropathic pain: rationale and clinical evidence” Eur J Pain 6 (Suppl A): 61-8), lamotrigine (See, Rozen, T. D. (2001) “Antiepileptic drugs in the management of cluster headache and trigeminal neuralgia” Headache 41 Suppl 1: S25-32 and Jensen, T. S. (2002) “Anticonvulsants in neuropathic pain: rationale and clinical evidence” Eur J Pain 6 (Suppl A): 61-8), and carbamazepine (See, Backonja, M. M. (2002) “Use of anticonvulsants for treatment of neuropathic pain” Neurology 59(5 Suppl 2): S14-7), have been shown to be useful attenuating pain in humans and animal models.
Hyperalgesia (extreme sensitivity to something painful) that develops in the presence of tissue injury or inflammation reflects, at least in part, an increase in the excitability of high-threshold primary afferent neurons innervating the site of injury. Voltage sensitive sodium channels activation is critical for the generation and propagation of neuronal action potentials. There is a growing body of evidence indicating that modulation of NaV currents is an endogenous mechanism used to control neuronal excitability (See, Goldin, A. L. (2001) “Resurgence of sodium channel research” Annu Rev Physiol 63: 871-94). Several kinetically and pharmacologically distinct voltage-gated sodium channels are found in dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons. The TTX-resistant current is insensitive to micromolar concentrations of tetrodotoxin, and displays slow activation and inactivation kinetics and a more depolarized activation threshold when compared to other voltage-gated sodium channels. TTX-resistant sodium currents are primarily restricted to a subpopulation of sensory neurons likely to be involved in nociception. Specifically, TTX-resistant sodium currents are expressed almost exclusively in neurons that have a small cell-body diameter; and give rise to small-diameter slow-conducting axons and that are responsive to capsaicin. A large body of experimental evidence demonstrates that TTX-resistant sodium channels are expressed on C-fibers and are important in the transmission of nociceptive information to the spinal cord.
Intrathecal administration of antisense oligo-deoxynucleotides targeting a unique region of the TTX-resistant sodium channel (NaV1.8) resulted in a significant reduction in PGE2-induced hyperalgesia (See, Khasar, S. G., M. S. Gold, et al. (1998) “A tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium current mediates inflammatory pain in the rat” Neurosci Lett 256(1): 17-20). More recently, a knockout mouse line was generated by Wood and colleagues, which lacks functional NaV1.8. The mutation has an analgesic effect in tests assessing the animal's response to the inflammatory agent carrageenan (See, Akopian, A. N., V. Souslova, et al. (1999) “The tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium channel SNS has a specialized function in pain pathways” Nat Neurosci 2(6): 541-8). In addition, deficit in both mechano- and thermoreception were observed in these animals. The analgesia shown by the Nav1.8 knockout mutants is consistent with observations about the role of TTX-resistant currents in nociception.
Immunohistochemical, in-situ hybridization and in-vitro electrophysiology experiments have all shown that the sodium channel NaV1.8 is selectively localized to the small sensory neurons of the dorsal root ganglion and trigeminal ganglion (See, Akopian, A. N., L. Sivilotti, et al. (1996) “A tetrodotoxin-resistant voltage-gated sodium channel expressed by sensory neurons” Nature 379(6562): 257-62). The primary role of these neurons is the detection and transmission of nociceptive stimuli. Antisense and immunohistochemical evidence also supports a role for NaV1.8 in neuropathic pain (See, Lai, J., M. S. Gold, et al. (2002) “Inhibition of neuropathic pain by decreased expression of the tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium channel, NaV1.8” Pain 95(1-2): 143-52, and Lai, J., J. C. Hunter, et al. (2000) “Blockade of neuropathic pain by antisense targeting of tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium channels in sensory neurons” Methods Enzymol 314: 201-13). NaV1.8 protein is upregulated along uninjured C-fibers adjacent to the nerve injury. Antisense treatment prevents the redistribution of NaV1.8 along the nerve and reverses neuropathic pain. Taken together the gene-knockout and antisense data support a role for NaV 1.8 in the detection and transmission of inflammatory and neuropathic pain.
In neuropathic pain states there is a remodeling of Na channel distribution and subtype. In the injured nerve, expression of NaV1.8 and NaV1.9 are greatly reduced whereas expression of the TTX sensitive subunit NaV1.3 is 5-10 fold upregulated (See, Dib-Hajj, S. D., J. Fjell, et al. (1999) “Plasticity of sodium channel expression in DRG neurons in the chronic constriction injury model of neuropathic pain” Pain 83(3): 591-600). The time course of the increase in NaV 1.3 parallels the appearance of allodynia in animal models subsequent to nerve injury. The biophysics of the NaV1.3 channel is distinctive in that it shows very fast repriming after inactivation following an action potential. This allows for sustained rates of high firing as is often seen in the injured nerve (See, Cummins, T. R., F. Aglieco, et al. (2001) “Nav1.3 sodium channels: rapid repriming and slow closed-state inactivation display quantitative differences after expression in a mammalian cell line and in spinal sensory neurons” J Neurosci 21(16): 5952-61). NaV1.3 is expressed in the central and peripheral systems of man. NaV1.9 is similar to NaV1.8 as it is selectively localized to small sensory neurons of the dorsal root ganglion and trigeminal ganglion (See, Fang, X., L. Djouhri, et al. (2002). “The presence and role of the tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium channel Na(v)1.9 (NaN) in nociceptive primary afferent neurons.” J Neurosci 22(17): 7425-33). It has a slow rate of inactivation and left-shifted voltage dependence for activation (See, Dib-Hajj, S., J. A. Black, et al. (2002) “NaN/Nav1.9: a sodium channel with unique properties” Trends Neurosci 25(5): 253-9). These two biophysical properties allow NaV1.9 to play a role in establishing the resting membrane potential of nociceptive neurons. The resting membrane potential of NaV1.9 expressing cells is in the −55 to −50 mV range compared to −65 mV for most other peripheral and central neurons. This persistent depolarization is in large part due to the sustained low-level activation of NaV1.9 channels. This depolarization allows the neurons to more easily reach the threshold for firing action potentials in response to nociceptive stimuli. Compounds that block the NaV1.9 channel may play an important role in establishing the set point for detection of painful stimuli. In chronic pain states, nerve and nerve ending can become swollen and hypersensitive exhibiting high frequency action potential firing with mild or even no stimulation. These pathologic nerve swellings are termed neuromas and the primary Na channels expressed in them are NaV 1.8 and NaV1.7 (See, Kretschmer, T., L. T. Happel, et al. (2002) “Accumulation of PN1 and PN3 sodium channels in painful human neuroma-evidence from immunocytochemistry” Acta Neurochir (Wien) 144(8): 803-10; discussion 810). NaV1.6 and NaV1.7 are also expressed in dorsal root ganglion neurons and contribute to the small TTX sensitive component seen in these cells. NaV 1.7 in particular my therefore be a potential pain target in addition to it's role in neuroendocrine excitability (See, Klugbauer, N., L. Lacinova, et al. (1995) “Structure and functional expression of a new member of the tetrodotoxin-sensitive voltage-activated sodium channel family from human neuroendocrine cells” Embo J 14(6): 1084-90).
NaV1.1 (See, Sugawara, T., E. Mazaki-Miyazaki, et al. (2001) “Nav 1.1 mutations cause febrile seizures associated with afebrile partial seizures.” Neurology 57(4): 703-5) and NaV1.2 (See, Sugawara, T., Y. Tsurubuchi, et al. (2001) “A missense mutation of the Na+ channel alpha II subunit gene Na(v) 1.2 in a patient with febrile and afebrile seizures causes channel dysfunction” Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98(11): 6384-9) have been linked to epilepsy conditions including febrile seizures. There are over 9 genetic mutations in NaV1.1 associated with febrile seizures (See, Meisler, M. H., J. A. Kearney, et al. (2002) “Mutations of voltage-gated sodium channels in movement disorders and epilepsy” Novartis Found Symp 241: 72-81)
Antagonists for NaV1.5 have been developed and used to treat cardiac arrhythmias. A gene defect in NaV1.5 that produces a larger noninactivating component to the current has been linked to long QT in man and the orally available local anesthetic mexilitine has been used to treat this condition (See, Wang, D. W., K. Yazawa, et al. (1997) “Pharmacological targeting of long QT mutant sodium channels.” J Clin Invest 99(7): 1714-20).
Several Na channel blockers are currently used or being tested in the clinic to treat epilepsy (See, Moulard, B. and D. Bertrand (2002) “Epilepsy and sodium channel blockers” Expert Opin. Ther. Patents 12(1): 85-91); acute (See, Wiffen, P., S. Collins, et al. (2000) “Anticonvulsant drugs for acute and chronic pain” Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3), chronic (See, Wiffen, P., S. Collins, et al. (2000) “Anticonvulsant drugs for acute and chronic pain” Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3, and Guay, D. R. (2001) “Adjunctive agents in the management of chronic pain” Pharmacotherapy 21(9): 1070-81), inflammatory (See, Gold, M. S. (1999) “Tetrodotoxin-resistant Na+ currents and inflammatory hyperalgesia.” Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96(14): 7645-9), and neuropathic pain (See, Strichartz, G. R., Z. Zhou, et al. (2002) “Therapeutic concentrations of local anaesthetics unveil the potential role of sodium channels in neuropathic pain” Novartis Found Symp 241:189-201, and Sandner-Kiesling, A., G. Rumpold Seitlinger, et al. (2002) “Lamotrigine monotherapy for control of neuralgia after nerve section” Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 46(10): 1261-4); cardiac arrhythmias (See, An, R. H., R. Bangalore, et al. (1996) “Lidocaine block of LQT-3 mutant human Na+ channels” Circ Res 79(1): 103-8, and Wang, D. W., K. Yazawa, et al. (1997) “Pharmacological targeting of long QT mutant sodium channels” J Clin Invest 99(7): 1714-20); neuroprotection (See, Taylor, C. P. and L. S, Narasimhan (1997) “Sodium channels and therapy of central nervous system diseases” Adv Pharmacol 39: 47-98) and as anesthetics (See, Strichartz, G. R., Z. Zhou, et al. (2002) “Therapeutic concentrations of local anaesthetics unveil the potential role of sodium channels in neuropathic pain.” Novartis Found Symp 241: 189-201).
Various animal models with clinical significance have been developed for the study of sodium channel modulators for numerous different pain indications. E.g., malignant chronic pain, see, Kohase, H., et al., Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2004; 48(3):382-3; femur cancer pain (see, Kohase, H., et al., Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2004; 48(3):382-3); non-malignant chronic bone pain (see, Ciocon, J. O. et al., J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994; 42(6):593-6); rheumatoid arthritis (see, Calvino, B. et al., Behav Brain Res. 1987; 24(1): 11-29); osteoarthritis (see, Guzman, R. E., et al., Toxicol Pathol. 2003; 31(6):619-24); spinal stenosis (see, Takenobu, Y. et al., J Neurosci Methods. 2001; 104(2):191-8); Neuropathic low back pain (see, Hines, R., et al., Pain Med. 2002; 3(4):361-5; Massie, J. B., et al., J Neurosci Methods. 2004; 137(2):283-9; neuropathic low back pain (see, Hines, R., et al., Pain Med. 2002; 3(4):361-5; Massie, J. B., et al., J Neurosci Methods. 2004; 137(2):283-9); myofascial pain syndrome (see, Dalpiaz & Dodds, J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2002; 16(1):99-104; Sluka K A et al., Muscle Nerve. 2001; 24(1):37-46); fibromyalgia (see, Bennet & Tai, Int J Clin Pharmacol Res. 1995; 15(3):115-9); temporomandibular joint pain (see, Ime H, Ren K, Brain Res Mol Brain Res. 1999; 67(1):87-97); chronic visceral pain, including, abdominal (see, Al-Chaer, E. D., et al., Gastroenterology. 2000; 119(5):1276-85); pelvic/perineal pain, (see, Wesselmann et al., Neurosci Lett. 1998; 246(2):73-6); pancreatic (see, Vera-Portocarrero, L. B., et al., Anesthesiology. 2003; 98(2):474-84); IBS pain (see, Verne, G. N., et al., Pain. 2003; 105(1-2):223-30; La J H et al., World Gastroenterol. 2003; 9(12):2791-5); chronic headache pain (see, Willimas & Stark, Cephalalgia. 2003; 23(10):963-71); migraine (see, Yamamura, H., et al., J Neurophysiol. 1999; 81(2):479-93); tension headache, including, cluster headaches (see, Costa, A., et al., Cephalalgia. 2000; 20(2):85-91); chronic neuropathic pain, including, post-herpetic neuralgia (see, Attal, N., et al., Neurology. 2004; 62(2):218-25; Kim & Chung 1992, Pain 50:355); diabetic neuropathy (see, Beidoun A et al., Clin J Pain. 2004; 20(3):174-8; Courteix, C., et al., Pain. 1993; 53(1):81-8); HIV-associated neuropathy (see, Portegies & Rosenberg, Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2001; 145(15):731-5; Joseph E K et al., Pain. 2004; 107(1-2):147-58; Oh, S. B., et al., J. Neurosci. 2001; 21(14):5027-35); trigeminal neuralgia (see, Sato, J., et al., Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004; 97(1):18-22; Imamura Y et al., Exp Brain Res. 1997; 116(1):97-103); Charcot-Marie Tooth neuropathy (see, Sereda, M., et al., Neuron. 1996; 16(5):1049-60); hereditary sensory neuropathies (see, Lee, M. J., et al., Hum Mol. Genet. 2003; 12(15):1917-25); peripheral nerve injury (see, Attal, N., et al., Neurology. 2004; 62(2):218-25; Kim & Chung 1992, Pain 50:355; Bennett & Xie, 1988, Pain 33:87; Decostered, I. & Woolf, C. J., 2000, Pain 87:149; Shir, Y. & Seltzer, Z. 1990; Neurosci Lett 115:62); painful neuromas (see, Nahabedian & Johnson, Ann Plast Surg. 2001; 46(1):15-22; Devor & Raber, Behav Neural Biol. 1983; 37(2):276-83); ectopic proximal and distal discharges (see, Liu, X. et al., Brain Res. 2001; 900(1):119-27); radiculopathy (see, Devers & Galer, (see, Clin J Pain. 2000; 16(3):205-8; Hayashi N et al., Spine. 1998; 23(8):877-85); chemotherapy induced neuropathic pain (see, Aley, K. O., et al., Neuroscience. 1996; 73(1):259-65); radiotherapy-induced neuropathic pain; post-mastectomy pain (see, Devers & Galer, Clin J Pain. 2000; 16(3):205-8); central pain (Cahana, A., et al., Anesth Analg. 2004; 98(6):1581-4), spinal cord injury pain (see, Hains, B. C., et al., Exp Neurol. 2000; 164(2):426-37); post-stroke pain; thalamic pain (see, LaBuda, C. J., et al., Neurosci Lett. 2000; 290(1):79-83); complex regional pain syndrome (see, Wallace, M. S., et al., Anesthesiology. 2000; 92(1):75-83; Xantos D et al., J Pain. 2004; 5(3 Suppl 2):S1); phantom pain (see, Weber, W. E., Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2001; 145(17):813-7; Levitt & Heyback, Pain. 1981; 10(1):67-73); intractable pain (see, Yokoyama, M., et al., Can J Anaesth. 2002; 49(8):810-3); acute pain, acute post-operative pain (see, Koppert, W., et al., Anesth Analg. 2004; 98(4):1050-5; Brennan, T. J., et al., Pain. 1996; 64(3):493-501); acute musculoskeletal pain; joint pain (see, Gotoh, S., et al., Ann Rheum Dis. 1993; 52(11):817-22); mechanical low back pain (see, Kehl, L. J., et al., Pain. 2000; 85(3):333-43); neck pain; tendonitis; injury/exercise pain (see, Sesay, M., et al., Can J Anaesth. 2002; 49(2):137-43); acute visceral pain, including, abdominal pain; pyelonephritis; appendicitis; cholecystitis; intestinal obstruction; hernias; etc (see, Giambernardino, M. A., et al., Pain. 1995; 61(3):459-69); chest pain, including, cardiac pain (see, Vergona, R. A., et al., Life Sci. 1984; 35(18):1877-84); pelvic pain, renal colic pain, acute obstetric pain, including, labor pain (see, Segal, S., et al., Anesth Analg. 1998; 87(4):864-9); cesarean section pain; acute inflammatory, burn and trauma pain; acute intermittent pain, including, endometriosis (see, Cason, A. M., et al., Horm Behav. 2003; 44(2):123-31); acute herpes zoster pain; sickle cell anemia; acute pancreatitis (see, Toma, H; Gastroenterology. 2000; 119(5):1373-81); breakthrough pain; orofacial pain, including, sinusitis pain, dental pain (see, Nusstein, J., et al., J Endod. 1998; 24(7):487-91; Chidiac, J. J., et al., Eur J Pain. 2002; 6(1):55-67); multiple sclerosis (MS) pain (see, Sakurai & Kanazawa, J Neurol Sci. 1999; 162(2):162-8); pain in depression (see, Greene B, Curr Med Res Opin. 2003; 19(4):272-7); leprosy pain; Behcet's disease pain; adiposis dolorosa (see, Devillers & Oranje, Clin Exp Dermatol. 1999; 24(3):240-1); phlebitic pain; Guillain-Barre pain; painful legs and moving toes; Haglund syndrome; erythromelalgia pain (see, Legroux-Crespel, E., et al., Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2003; 130(4):429-33); Fabry's disease pain (see, Germain, D. P., J Soc Biol. 2002; 196(2):183-90); Bladder and urogenital disease, including, urinary incontinence (see, Berggren, T., et al., J Urol. 1993; 150(5 Pt 1):1540-3); hyperactivity bladder (see, Chuang, Y. C., et al., Urology. 2003; 61(3):664-70); painful bladder syndrome (see, Yoshimura, N., et al., J. Neurosci. 2001; 21(21):8690-6); interstitial cyctitis (IC) (see, Giannakopoulos & Campilomatos, Arch Ital Urol Nefrol Androl. 1992; 64(4):337-9; Boucher, M., et al., J Urol. 2000; 164(1):203-8); and prostatitis (see, Mayersak, J. S., Int Surg. 1998; 83(4):347-9; Keith, I. M., et al., J Urol. 2001; 166(1):323-8).
Unfortunately, as described above, the efficacy of currently used sodium channel blockers for the disease states described above has been to a large extent limited by a number of side effects. These side effects include various CNS disturbances such as blurred vision, dizziness, nausea, and sedation as well more potentially life threatening cardiac arrhythmias and cardiac failure. Such undesirable side effects may be avoided by using a Na channel blocker that exhibit a degree of selectivity in its activity against a Na channel subtype. However, Na channel blockers currently in the market lack such selectivity. Perhaps because of this lack of molecular selectivity, drugs currently in the market exhibit use-dependent block and generally show higher affinity at depolarized potentials resulting in the preferential targeting of actively firing neurons, believed to be a key factor in the therapeutic window of existing Na channel blocking drugs. While every drug has it own unique therapeutic profile, current Na channel blockers are generally associated with central nervous system (CNS) and cardiovascular (CV) side-effects, including blood pressure changes, which are often dose-limiting. Dizziness, sedation, nausea, ataxia, and confusion are some of the specific side-effects observed for Phenyloin™, Mexiletine™, and Lidocaine™.
Accordingly, there remains a need to develop additional Na channel antagonists, preferably those with higher potency and fewer side effects.